Thursday, March 12, 2015

Riddle me this

If you're against the United States going to war against ISIS (as I am), then of course you would be against it. If you're for a wider war against the group than the current bombing campaign, then you would be against it because the authorization restricts the use of ground forces, If you're for the current campaign against at ISIS, a bombing campaign and coordination and training of local ground forces without American ground troops, then there still isn't any reason to support this resolution because the U.S. is already doing just that without any new authorization for use of force, At best, the resolution is just unnecessary, but it also includes all these extra goodies that would continue to authorize an endless war in the region against whoever the then-current president decides is an "associated force", even if ISIS itself is long gone.

So what is the argument for the bill? The only thing I can think of is to signal your support of the President. But aren't there a lot of better ways to signal support that doesn't run the risk of giving permission for an endless bloodbath? Can anyone think of a better reason to support it?